bheemi
07-24 09:43 AM
IV core team:
Can you please respond to the possiblity of questions raised by rpatel.
thanks
Can you please respond to the possiblity of questions raised by rpatel.
thanks
wallpaper Taylor Swift at School
logiclife
01-16 10:44 AM
We sent out a newsletter last night and out of 8400 emails, we have nearly 250 bounced back.
Emails like a@abc.com are obviously bogus emails.
See, I can understand the reason for that, you dont want spam. But we send out newsletter less than 2-3 times a month. And we dont sell information.
So please update your email addresses. So that we can reach you when we send out action alerts like "Call or webfax this or that congressional office".
Thanks.
Emails like a@abc.com are obviously bogus emails.
See, I can understand the reason for that, you dont want spam. But we send out newsletter less than 2-3 times a month. And we dont sell information.
So please update your email addresses. So that we can reach you when we send out action alerts like "Call or webfax this or that congressional office".
Thanks.
dotnetguru
04-08 11:11 PM
Well..you cut your BS first..just because Its not first hand doesnt mean it is unreal..just because I posted on IV doesnt mean I expected IV to take up this case..just b'coz sucker like you saw two different lanes in the airport doesnt mean all airports are like that..I posted my experience in the airport I travelled thru..I dont have to prove to morons like you.
You dont need to be best and brightest to tell me that Airports have different lanes..Oh..yeah...how will I know..I sneaked through Texas border...I never said all ppl stand in the same lane..I said, queues are different but unless you are deaf to your a** you can hear most of the conversation..atleast I did..I dont care if you didnt in your case?
different lanes means like up to 5 to 20 lanes for only citizens and gc holders.there will be some space with the division with that belt u see in airports and then up to 5 to 20 lanes for visa holders.number of lanes differ based on the size of the airport.this is what i have seen in newark,ATL,PHI,CLT,MIA.now ur friends might be in corner lane and then there is space and then that visa holder who got sent back is also in corner lane to be able to hear if at all it is possible to hear.so now tell me which airports do not have separation like that. any one can pitch in.i could hardly hear the next person questions how come ur friend had heard in the above scenario.beats me...
You dont need to be best and brightest to tell me that Airports have different lanes..Oh..yeah...how will I know..I sneaked through Texas border...I never said all ppl stand in the same lane..I said, queues are different but unless you are deaf to your a** you can hear most of the conversation..atleast I did..I dont care if you didnt in your case?
different lanes means like up to 5 to 20 lanes for only citizens and gc holders.there will be some space with the division with that belt u see in airports and then up to 5 to 20 lanes for visa holders.number of lanes differ based on the size of the airport.this is what i have seen in newark,ATL,PHI,CLT,MIA.now ur friends might be in corner lane and then there is space and then that visa holder who got sent back is also in corner lane to be able to hear if at all it is possible to hear.so now tell me which airports do not have separation like that. any one can pitch in.i could hardly hear the next person questions how come ur friend had heard in the above scenario.beats me...
2011 makeup taylor swift tumblr
xyzgc
01-17 11:56 PM
Got lots of reds as expected. Excuse me for using strong words. I'm sympathetic towards everyone who has lost jobs or fears layoffs. I have weathered the 2001 storm in the valley. It was horrible. However, people buy expensive real estate without obtaining permanent residency first and then start laughing at others for being so conservative. Its utter stupidity. In one of the other threads I was arguing with some one over whether its a good time to buy a house or not. I am totally for buying a house even in these uncertain times provided you are a dual income and provided you have your green card and despite that some folks didn't agree with me at all!
Today, buying hiouses is risky but folks don't realize if you are on H1B, it is a temp visa you are sticking your neck out. Even if you have your EAD, it doesn't mean shit. If your employer revokes your 140 you are more or less doomed, unless you are very lucky. Now, please don't dispute this statement of mine by presenting legal facts.
I look at it this way, your gc is controlled by your employer, you get laid off by your employer, your company has ZERO interest in keeping your job position alive and considering employing you at a future date. Period.
H1B is not green card, EAD is not green card, your PD being current is not a green card.f you think you can transfer your H1 with some consulting firm and retain H1 status on bench, you are playing with fire.
Giving reds to me is not going to change the basic facts. Leaving your cars and your houses behind without paying your dues is the worst crime in the book. It destroys your credibility. Not only that you, main street, are then responsible for mortgage crisis and then you coolly blame the wall street and Mr. Bush for everything that goes wrong.
Today, buying hiouses is risky but folks don't realize if you are on H1B, it is a temp visa you are sticking your neck out. Even if you have your EAD, it doesn't mean shit. If your employer revokes your 140 you are more or less doomed, unless you are very lucky. Now, please don't dispute this statement of mine by presenting legal facts.
I look at it this way, your gc is controlled by your employer, you get laid off by your employer, your company has ZERO interest in keeping your job position alive and considering employing you at a future date. Period.
H1B is not green card, EAD is not green card, your PD being current is not a green card.f you think you can transfer your H1 with some consulting firm and retain H1 status on bench, you are playing with fire.
Giving reds to me is not going to change the basic facts. Leaving your cars and your houses behind without paying your dues is the worst crime in the book. It destroys your credibility. Not only that you, main street, are then responsible for mortgage crisis and then you coolly blame the wall street and Mr. Bush for everything that goes wrong.
more...
glus
09-10 03:27 PM
so....recess until 5pm... :-(
johnwright03
07-01 09:38 AM
06/30/2007: Potential EB Visa Number Exhaution in July and Probable Actions of State Department or USCIS
* By now, people understand that the sources of potential action by the State Department or USCIS are predicated on the two important facts. One was the information from a government source that there were only about 40,000 numbers left for the entire EB visa numbers for the FY 2007 which ends on September 30, 2007. The second important fact was that reportedly the USCIS alone had far more than 40,000 I-485 applications in the backlog queue that were reportedly ready for approval. Considering the fact that the immigrant visa numbers are consumed by the approval of I-485 applications by the USCIS and the approval of immigant visa applications in the consular processing by visa posts througout the world, 40,000 visa numbers could be fairly quickly exhausted in early July 2007. This prediction was exacerbated by the information that the USCIS was apparently picking up the pace of I-485 adjudications lately.
* Obviously the State Department has been in communication with the USCIS and was well aware of the situation. Sources reported that the State Department might revise the July Visa Bulletin either Monday or Tuesday to reflect the situation. However, it is unclear at this point whether this will occur on Monday or Tuesday or, for that matter, some time soon, particulary considering the ongoing uproar in the nation. Assuming that the EB immigrant visa number will be exhausted before the end of July, from the government perspectives, they may have two options to handle this matter. One is the State Department revises the Visa Bulletin based on the newly developed facts and predictions. The other option is that the State Department does not take any action of revising the Visa Bulletin but just notify the USCIS when the visa numbers for certain categories are exhausted. The initial sources of rumor was the former possibility. However, as updated by the AILA afterwards, it might or might not happen.
* Whether the State Department revises the July visa bulletin or not, the fact will remain that 40,000 numbers could indeed be run out in a fairly short period of time in July. It is too obvious that under the statute, when the visa numbers are exhausted, the USCIS will not be able to approve any I-485 applications, and for that reason, the USCIS may wrongly reject the incoming I-485 applications or return I-485 applications which were received after the date when the visa number is exhausted. This happened for the "other worker" category in June when the priority date was current in June for certain other workers. The issue of legality of such action of the USCIS is rooted in the required distinction of the USCIS statutory mandates between its job of adjudication of 485 applications "already in the pipeline" and its job of "accepting new 485 applications." Arguably, when the visa number runs out, there is no question about that the USCIS should not and cannot adjudicate and approve any 485 applications. But there is no legal basis that the USCIS should not and cannot "accept" new 485 applications when the cases fall within the cut-off date of the monthly visa bulletin. If the State Department attempts to revise the July Visa Bulletin, probably they are doing it to overcome the predicament of the USCIS that will face in rejecting the new 485 applications. The problem is the State Department's own legal problem or authority to revise the published Visa Bulletin. Accordingly, either USCIS or State Department will be liable for either abuse of power or arbitrary act depending on who acts. The AILF is planning to sue the USCIS for rejecting "other worker" new 485 applications in June probably on ultra vires or other statutory authority grounds. Should the same thing happen in July, the AILF intends to extend its lawsuit to cover the July 2007 485 applicants, probably in the form of class action. What happens if the State Department revises the Visa Bulletin and the USCIS rejects the new applications based on the new Visa Bulletin? Strictly speaking, there may be no cause of action against the USCIS in that it followed the State Department's Visa Bulletin for the month of July. In this case, probably the lawsuit will have to be directed to the State Department for violation of law in revising the visa bulletin. We will soon find out.
* Where does this leave to the July 485 applicants? Fact remains that all likelihood, the annual limit may reach fairly early in July and they should file their cases before the visa posts and the USCIS exhaust all the numbers. They have to do this probably for the two reasons. One is that should the government take the second option of rejecting new cases after reaching the limit just as we experienced in the other worker cases, those who filed the I-485 application before that date will not be affected. Those who files the application after the date of exhaution and receive rejection of the 485 applications may be entitled to sue the USCIS either in a class action or individually. Secondly, if the government takes the first option of the State Department revising the July Visa Bulletin, they will have to sue the State Department and for that purpose, they should have filed I-485 applications within July 2007. Otherwise, they may have a standing to sue the State Department.
* For the foregoing reasons, we urge the July 485 filers to file the applications as soon as possible. At the same time, we urge the State Department and the USCIS not to take any actions to avoid the lawsuits. They should keep accepting I-485 applications even after the enhaution of the FY 2007 numbers, even though they will not be able to adjudicate these applications until the visa numbers become current again. Again, the agencies should distinguish the requirement for adjudication of 485 applications and the requirement for acceptance of new applications. These are two separate things.
* By now, people understand that the sources of potential action by the State Department or USCIS are predicated on the two important facts. One was the information from a government source that there were only about 40,000 numbers left for the entire EB visa numbers for the FY 2007 which ends on September 30, 2007. The second important fact was that reportedly the USCIS alone had far more than 40,000 I-485 applications in the backlog queue that were reportedly ready for approval. Considering the fact that the immigrant visa numbers are consumed by the approval of I-485 applications by the USCIS and the approval of immigant visa applications in the consular processing by visa posts througout the world, 40,000 visa numbers could be fairly quickly exhausted in early July 2007. This prediction was exacerbated by the information that the USCIS was apparently picking up the pace of I-485 adjudications lately.
* Obviously the State Department has been in communication with the USCIS and was well aware of the situation. Sources reported that the State Department might revise the July Visa Bulletin either Monday or Tuesday to reflect the situation. However, it is unclear at this point whether this will occur on Monday or Tuesday or, for that matter, some time soon, particulary considering the ongoing uproar in the nation. Assuming that the EB immigrant visa number will be exhausted before the end of July, from the government perspectives, they may have two options to handle this matter. One is the State Department revises the Visa Bulletin based on the newly developed facts and predictions. The other option is that the State Department does not take any action of revising the Visa Bulletin but just notify the USCIS when the visa numbers for certain categories are exhausted. The initial sources of rumor was the former possibility. However, as updated by the AILA afterwards, it might or might not happen.
* Whether the State Department revises the July visa bulletin or not, the fact will remain that 40,000 numbers could indeed be run out in a fairly short period of time in July. It is too obvious that under the statute, when the visa numbers are exhausted, the USCIS will not be able to approve any I-485 applications, and for that reason, the USCIS may wrongly reject the incoming I-485 applications or return I-485 applications which were received after the date when the visa number is exhausted. This happened for the "other worker" category in June when the priority date was current in June for certain other workers. The issue of legality of such action of the USCIS is rooted in the required distinction of the USCIS statutory mandates between its job of adjudication of 485 applications "already in the pipeline" and its job of "accepting new 485 applications." Arguably, when the visa number runs out, there is no question about that the USCIS should not and cannot adjudicate and approve any 485 applications. But there is no legal basis that the USCIS should not and cannot "accept" new 485 applications when the cases fall within the cut-off date of the monthly visa bulletin. If the State Department attempts to revise the July Visa Bulletin, probably they are doing it to overcome the predicament of the USCIS that will face in rejecting the new 485 applications. The problem is the State Department's own legal problem or authority to revise the published Visa Bulletin. Accordingly, either USCIS or State Department will be liable for either abuse of power or arbitrary act depending on who acts. The AILF is planning to sue the USCIS for rejecting "other worker" new 485 applications in June probably on ultra vires or other statutory authority grounds. Should the same thing happen in July, the AILF intends to extend its lawsuit to cover the July 2007 485 applicants, probably in the form of class action. What happens if the State Department revises the Visa Bulletin and the USCIS rejects the new applications based on the new Visa Bulletin? Strictly speaking, there may be no cause of action against the USCIS in that it followed the State Department's Visa Bulletin for the month of July. In this case, probably the lawsuit will have to be directed to the State Department for violation of law in revising the visa bulletin. We will soon find out.
* Where does this leave to the July 485 applicants? Fact remains that all likelihood, the annual limit may reach fairly early in July and they should file their cases before the visa posts and the USCIS exhaust all the numbers. They have to do this probably for the two reasons. One is that should the government take the second option of rejecting new cases after reaching the limit just as we experienced in the other worker cases, those who filed the I-485 application before that date will not be affected. Those who files the application after the date of exhaution and receive rejection of the 485 applications may be entitled to sue the USCIS either in a class action or individually. Secondly, if the government takes the first option of the State Department revising the July Visa Bulletin, they will have to sue the State Department and for that purpose, they should have filed I-485 applications within July 2007. Otherwise, they may have a standing to sue the State Department.
* For the foregoing reasons, we urge the July 485 filers to file the applications as soon as possible. At the same time, we urge the State Department and the USCIS not to take any actions to avoid the lawsuits. They should keep accepting I-485 applications even after the enhaution of the FY 2007 numbers, even though they will not be able to adjudicate these applications until the visa numbers become current again. Again, the agencies should distinguish the requirement for adjudication of 485 applications and the requirement for acceptance of new applications. These are two separate things.
more...
masouds
02-16 12:00 PM
Don't tell me that If I come from India, I don't assimilate with the local population.
You don't get it, do you? I've never talked about you. What I am saying is simply this: If you don't limit the number of immigrants from one country, you essentially become a part of that country with the influx of people coming from there. This is what people in America are afraid of. They can't limit the influx of illegal immigrants from Mexico and other latin america countries, and it is becoming a big deal for them, since they don't want to be forced to learn spanish next time they go to a diner.
Is it racist? probably so. But remember, it is their country; They make the laws. They can make people dance for 5 minutes at ports of entry while they film it and post it to youtube if they like (see recent articles about search and seizures of returning greencard holders' electronic equipment).
If you support the old colonist and racist mentality , you stand no where. If you are so afraid of competing with Chinese and Indians that you have to refer Black period of American history, then my friend you don't belong on this website.
And who the hell are you to tell me this?
We don't represent any nationality here at IV but there is a good population of Indians and Chinese on this website and you don't wanna offend them with your racism. Again there is freedom of speech but you can take your a$$ to some anti-indian or anti-chinese blog if you want to release your bigotry.
What did I say? What I mentioned was the natural tendency of people of one language and one common background to gather together and stay together, even though the whole society asks them "Please forget your background and become one of us". How is that racist? This law stops the society to become divided into two factions of 'Us' vs. 'Irish' or 'Us' vs. 'Italians' or 'Us' vs. 'Iranians', etc. There have been several waves of people coming to US for whatever reasons; They are just making sure this doesn't happen again.
This per country cap law is very much like the tax code. If you change it to favor one class of people, you end up screwing everyone else. The current immigration law favors me, so I am happy. It doesn't favor you, so you are (understandably) unhappy. Calling me racist and trying to chase me out of IV is not going to solve your problem.
You don't get it, do you? I've never talked about you. What I am saying is simply this: If you don't limit the number of immigrants from one country, you essentially become a part of that country with the influx of people coming from there. This is what people in America are afraid of. They can't limit the influx of illegal immigrants from Mexico and other latin america countries, and it is becoming a big deal for them, since they don't want to be forced to learn spanish next time they go to a diner.
Is it racist? probably so. But remember, it is their country; They make the laws. They can make people dance for 5 minutes at ports of entry while they film it and post it to youtube if they like (see recent articles about search and seizures of returning greencard holders' electronic equipment).
If you support the old colonist and racist mentality , you stand no where. If you are so afraid of competing with Chinese and Indians that you have to refer Black period of American history, then my friend you don't belong on this website.
And who the hell are you to tell me this?
We don't represent any nationality here at IV but there is a good population of Indians and Chinese on this website and you don't wanna offend them with your racism. Again there is freedom of speech but you can take your a$$ to some anti-indian or anti-chinese blog if you want to release your bigotry.
What did I say? What I mentioned was the natural tendency of people of one language and one common background to gather together and stay together, even though the whole society asks them "Please forget your background and become one of us". How is that racist? This law stops the society to become divided into two factions of 'Us' vs. 'Irish' or 'Us' vs. 'Italians' or 'Us' vs. 'Iranians', etc. There have been several waves of people coming to US for whatever reasons; They are just making sure this doesn't happen again.
This per country cap law is very much like the tax code. If you change it to favor one class of people, you end up screwing everyone else. The current immigration law favors me, so I am happy. It doesn't favor you, so you are (understandably) unhappy. Calling me racist and trying to chase me out of IV is not going to solve your problem.
2010 2011 taylor swift tumblr
amitjoey
02-14 11:33 AM
I understand your frustration, but the rules are the same for everybody, and if India sends more immigrants to the US then any other country, that\\\'s not the US Government\'s fault.
If there were not per country limits, Indians would consume all those EB visas visas leaving no chance to the applicants from other countries to immigrate to the US legally.
That is not true.. Let me explain.. I want to give you an example to illustrate what the issue is: Think of a grocery check out line and let us assume for a moment that there are seperate counters for Indians, Chinese, Phill, MEX, ROW. So there are 5 counters. What is happening right now is that the queque for Indians and chinese and other retrogressed countries is long and snakes thru the aisles and they have to wait hours before they can check out, whereas ROW applicants can check out in minutes.
So it is not like Indians, or other retrogressed countries will consume all EB visas, If there were no country quotas. it is just that the waiting time to get one will be equal for everyone, irrespective of country of birth. That is how it should be, since it is an employment based visa..
The logic of employment based visas is that it was created to give visas (GC) to the applicants that were most needed by the US Employers at any given time. If the most qualified applicants that US employers prefer happen to be phillipinoes or chinese or Indians, that would mean there are more of those nationals.
If there were not per country limits, Indians would consume all those EB visas visas leaving no chance to the applicants from other countries to immigrate to the US legally.
That is not true.. Let me explain.. I want to give you an example to illustrate what the issue is: Think of a grocery check out line and let us assume for a moment that there are seperate counters for Indians, Chinese, Phill, MEX, ROW. So there are 5 counters. What is happening right now is that the queque for Indians and chinese and other retrogressed countries is long and snakes thru the aisles and they have to wait hours before they can check out, whereas ROW applicants can check out in minutes.
So it is not like Indians, or other retrogressed countries will consume all EB visas, If there were no country quotas. it is just that the waiting time to get one will be equal for everyone, irrespective of country of birth. That is how it should be, since it is an employment based visa..
The logic of employment based visas is that it was created to give visas (GC) to the applicants that were most needed by the US Employers at any given time. If the most qualified applicants that US employers prefer happen to be phillipinoes or chinese or Indians, that would mean there are more of those nationals.
more...
gk_2000
08-10 08:39 PM
I have no intention of playing spoilsport if you are taking some good faith initiative. In fact, if there is some campaign launched on this - I will probably even contribute (well - if you are doing something in good faith for a community then I have a moral obligation to support it if it is not harmful for the community).
However, this part "I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis" souonds wishful to me based on my understanding of what the immigration law says. I spent some time going over the law a couple of years ago - so its possible that my memory may be failing me. If you can show some place in the Immigration law that actually supports this reinterpretation then I will correct myself.
You are absolutely right in pointing out the need to really see the law. I just dived into it. I will try to study it more thoroughly, as there are possibly multiple places we could explore in the language; not just this one. If I get more ideas I will come back and post them here.
I request all members to participate in the other thread discussing the various provisions of the INA
However, this part "I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis" souonds wishful to me based on my understanding of what the immigration law says. I spent some time going over the law a couple of years ago - so its possible that my memory may be failing me. If you can show some place in the Immigration law that actually supports this reinterpretation then I will correct myself.
You are absolutely right in pointing out the need to really see the law. I just dived into it. I will try to study it more thoroughly, as there are possibly multiple places we could explore in the language; not just this one. If I get more ideas I will come back and post them here.
I request all members to participate in the other thread discussing the various provisions of the INA
hair taylor swift tumblr quotes
virtual55
07-03 09:11 AM
with out a reliable website, we can't communicate and do all the important things(productive) you are talking. maintaining a reliable website doesn't need much funds.
Anti immigrants will not know our plans if we may this a paid website.
Anti immigrants will not know our plans if we may this a paid website.
more...
thirdworldman
02-24 11:28 AM
I can definately comply with 2 weeks
hot taylor swift song quotes.
thirdworldman
03-12 11:01 AM
Haha, I didn't think anyone would actually pick up on that, Pink. Oh, well. Anyway, thanks for the comments and votes. I think everyone did a great job. Eilsoe, awesome wireframe.
more...
house taylor swift tumblr quotes
raj2007
03-07 02:50 PM
I am employed with a company and I work for a client through a preferred vendor. I am in a slightly difficult situation. I would like to do AC21 with the vendor and negotiate for more. This might irk the vendor and he could in turn tell my employer about this. I cannot put in my papers with my employer without having an offer from the vendor in hand. I cannot join the client directly because of hiring freeze.
My question is, if due to the above exercise my employer cancels my H1, will I be immediately be out of status, does having EAD means that I will be in status even if my H1 is cancelled?.. How much time will I have to join a new employer using EAD if my H1 is cancelled or revoked.?.
Thanks,
Your vendor is desi guy?
I have never seen vendor informing the employer.
You are ok even if he cancels ur H1.
My question is, if due to the above exercise my employer cancels my H1, will I be immediately be out of status, does having EAD means that I will be in status even if my H1 is cancelled?.. How much time will I have to join a new employer using EAD if my H1 is cancelled or revoked.?.
Thanks,
Your vendor is desi guy?
I have never seen vendor informing the employer.
You are ok even if he cancels ur H1.
tattoo taylor swift tumblr quotes
ajthakur
07-14 06:25 PM
I filed EAD renewal on May 28 2008.
Service Center: Nebraska
When did u file your application for EAD renewal and which service center? I am not sure why you think EAD renewal triggered this I-485 RFE?
Service Center: Nebraska
When did u file your application for EAD renewal and which service center? I am not sure why you think EAD renewal triggered this I-485 RFE?
more...
pictures hot taylor swift tumblr
jonty_11
03-18 03:33 PM
Dont pin any hopes, only to see them come crashing down....
The dates will retrogress again as USCIS realizes the mamoth amount of applications for EB2 - India that are in the pipeline which they may not even have accounted for yet.
We are in for a long wait unless we get admin fixes or legislation...
PLease support IVs campaigns...
The dates will retrogress again as USCIS realizes the mamoth amount of applications for EB2 - India that are in the pipeline which they may not even have accounted for yet.
We are in for a long wait unless we get admin fixes or legislation...
PLease support IVs campaigns...
dresses tumblrphotographyxox
mallikonnet
06-10 09:26 PM
done
more...
makeup As a quot;quote collectorquot;,
IMGPAT
05-05 08:33 PM
Follow the url and refer Q.31, clearly answers your question.
http://www.immigration.com/faq/lvisa.html#77.
http://www.immigration.com/faq/lvisa.html#77.
girlfriend 20 Days Taylor Swift Lyrics
Macaca
01-30 07:11 PM
Unpaid bench means you are "Out of Status". Not illegal.
I have never heard USCIS penalizing unpaid bench. If it a problem and such a common case, why don't we ever hear about penalty against unpaid bench?
Is it possible to take unpaid leave every year?
In teaching you have an option of not teaching in summer. This means you do not get 2-3 pay checks; happens every year because most faculty don't teach in summer. Faculty is not even aware that absence of pay checks can be a problem.
I have never heard USCIS penalizing unpaid bench. If it a problem and such a common case, why don't we ever hear about penalty against unpaid bench?
Is it possible to take unpaid leave every year?
In teaching you have an option of not teaching in summer. This means you do not get 2-3 pay checks; happens every year because most faculty don't teach in summer. Faculty is not even aware that absence of pay checks can be a problem.
hairstyles taylor swift tumblr-best
meridiani.planum
07-21 04:01 AM
Hello Gurus,
I have red in many places that there is some cases which are "Low hanging fruits" or "Ripe cases" when they say this what exactly this means? my understand is that for USCIS every case which has all proper supporting documents then they will adjudicate that case no matter what if VISA number available, can some one help in understanding what is "Low hanging fruits" or "Ripe cases" :confused::confused:
once you get past the I-140, the typical reasons for denial of I-485 are some criminal background, out of status >180 days, mistakes on forms etc.
IMO a simple case would be someone who:
- has never changed employers
- was employed with a large US corporation which is more likely to have paid him his salary every month (as opposed to a 3-4 person company where getting hold of the W-2 is the only way to confirm).
- was never denied any application (change of status / entry to US)
- has clear medical records
- has clear documents related to birth certificate
Complicated cases are when:
- someone has repeatedly changed and employers since entering the US. The IO will need to make sure status was maintained throughout all those transitions.
- some document was not submitted, or not submitted with transalations/affidavits etc. Commonly birth certificate issues.
I have red in many places that there is some cases which are "Low hanging fruits" or "Ripe cases" when they say this what exactly this means? my understand is that for USCIS every case which has all proper supporting documents then they will adjudicate that case no matter what if VISA number available, can some one help in understanding what is "Low hanging fruits" or "Ripe cases" :confused::confused:
once you get past the I-140, the typical reasons for denial of I-485 are some criminal background, out of status >180 days, mistakes on forms etc.
IMO a simple case would be someone who:
- has never changed employers
- was employed with a large US corporation which is more likely to have paid him his salary every month (as opposed to a 3-4 person company where getting hold of the W-2 is the only way to confirm).
- was never denied any application (change of status / entry to US)
- has clear medical records
- has clear documents related to birth certificate
Complicated cases are when:
- someone has repeatedly changed and employers since entering the US. The IO will need to make sure status was maintained throughout all those transitions.
- some document was not submitted, or not submitted with transalations/affidavits etc. Commonly birth certificate issues.
DSLStart
09-10 02:33 PM
curretnly debating on HR6020 about illegal immigrants.
Hassan11
07-17 02:31 PM
let us keep fighting /exposing these liars.
No comments:
Post a Comment